Climatologists Trade Tips on Destroying Evidence, Evangelizing Warming

[OohPooPahDoo]

I don't believe you're applying those laws correctly to this situation. Please show how it isn't possible for a photon re-emitted by a CO2 molecule to travel towards earth. DO NOT use mathematical formulas in your answer. If you're correct, you should be able to lay this to rest solely by describing the mechanism.

I already have konradv. Repeating over and over for you is not going to help you understand it any better though. I have explained it to you in the simplest terms that I could think of and you still didn't get it.

The second law of thermodynamics states: "It is not possible for heat to flow from a colder body to a warmer body without any work having been done to accomplish this flow. Energy will not flow spontaneously from a low temperature object to a higher temperature object."

The earth is warmer than the atmosphere. Which part of "not possible" and "will not" do you believe means "possible" for heat to flow from the cooler atmosphere to the warmer earth in direct contradiction to the 2nd law of thermodynamics?

It flows from the Earth to space SLOWER because of greenhouse gasses Jeez its not that hard to understand. You're really over thinking it.

 

[wirebender]

See what you're missing above

I haven't missed a thing. Absorption and emission do not constitute work. For someone who claims a knowledge of physics, you keep making some very basic errors. Work is equal to the amount of force multiplied by the distance over which it is applied. How do you suppose you might apply the definition of work to absorption and emission. Absorption and emssion are a means of conducting energy but conduction does not constitute work either.

 

[OohPooPahDoo]

When you can answer a question I ask, let me know.

They still stand.

"What the hell?" isn't a question that needs answering.

And, it is very interesting that you aren't familiar with Scripps.

We all know you're the smartest person here because you are so familiar with the Scripps Research Institute - and in fact you know everything - but its interesting you would expect a astrophysicist to be familiar with a biomedical research group. The two fields are miles and miles apart.

Yeah right astrophysicist Sure buddy sure..... I'm surprised you could spell it, did you need help with that one?

My dissertation work was on the stability of mass transfer in interacting double white dwarf binaries whose accretion rates exceed the critical Eddington rate, and numerical techniques to model such binaries on massively parallel computers.

 

[wirebender]

It flows from the Earth to space SLOWER because of greenhouse gasses Jeez its not that hard to understand. You're really over thinking it.

IR radiates from the earth at, or near the speed of light and proceeds into space at or near the speed of light. You can not "slow down" radiation and your claims of "bouncing around" simply are not supported by the physical reality of the atmosphere.

 

[OohPooPahDoo]

See what you're missing above

I haven't missed a thing. Absorption and emission do not constitute work.

You don't even know what you're talking about. When a photon impacts an atom or molecule it does indeed perform work on it. Its called "radiation pressure". You should look it up.

For someone who claims a knowledge of physics, you keep making some very basic errors. Work is equal to the amount of force multiplied by the distance over which it is applied. How do you suppose you might apply the definition of work to absorption and emission. Absorption and emssion are a means of conducting energy but conduction does not constitute work either.

No work will be performed if the photons momenta are isotropically distributed, but if they are flowing in a preferential direction, they will indeed perform work on whatever matter they interact with. Again, its called radiation pressure

Radiation pressure - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

You are the most sophomoric person I've ever met.

 

[OohPooPahDoo]

It flows from the Earth to space SLOWER because of greenhouse gasses Jeez its not that hard to understand. You're really over thinking it.

IR radiates from the earth at, or near the speed of light and proceeds into space at or near the speed of light.

ITS SCATTERED ALONG the WAY

For the same reason, it takes photons produced at the center of the Sun many thousands of years or to reach the surface.

Please go learn yourself some basic physics and come back to us later. Try reading about the difference between radiation in the diffusion limit and radiation in the streaming limit.

You can not "slow down" radiation and your claims of "bouncing around" simply are not supported by the physical reality of the atmosphere.

Jesus christ you are the most stubbornly ignorant person in the world.

 

[wirebender]

You don't even know what you're talking about. When a photon impacts an atom or molecule it does indeed perform work on it. Its called "radiation pressure". You should look it up.

I know what radiation pressure is and it is not work.

 

[wirebender]

ITS SCATTERED ALONG the WAY

Shouting it won't make it true. Scattered by what? One absorption and emission and it is done. Other CO2 molecules can't absorb and emit it. Which other so called greenhouse gas absorbs and emits at a frequency so near CO2?

For the same reason, it takes photons produced at the center of the Sun many thousands of years or to reach the surface.

Already been through that and you exposed yourself as someone who is not working on a phD in astrophysics right there. Anyone pursuing that field of study at that level knows that the photons radiating from the core of the sun are in an enviornment involving a balance between the radiation and the local temperature. The time it takes for them to travel from the core to space is a result of the time it takes for the energy to be transferred, not the speed or random movements of the photons.

No intellectually honest person with a background in astrophysics would attempt to even begin to analogize photons radiating from the core of the sun to photons radiating from the surface of the earth so you are either dishonest in your claim of pursuit of a phD in astrophysics or are just dishonest.

 

[OohPooPahDoo]

You don't even know what you're talking about. When a photon impacts an atom or molecule it does indeed perform work on it. Its called "radiation pressure". You should look it up.

I know what radiation pressure is and it is not work.

Pressure does work shit for brains.

 

[OohPooPahDoo]

ITS SCATTERED ALONG the WAY

Shouting it won't make it true. Scattered by what? One absorption and emission and it is done. Other CO2 molecules can't absorb and emit it. Which other so called greenhouse gas absorbs and emits at a frequency so near CO2?

It doesn't matter if it doesn't get absorbed again, there's still a 50% chance it will be scattered back TOWARDS THE EARTH.

For the same reason, it takes photons produced at the center of the Sun many thousands of years or to reach the surface.

Already been through that and you exposed yourself as someone who is not working on a phD in astrophysics right there. Anyone pursuing that field of study at that level knows that the photons radiating from the core of the sun are in an enviornment involving a balance between the radiation and the local temperature. The time it takes for them to travel from the core to space is a result of the time it takes for the energy to be transferred, not the speed or random movements of the photons.

So now photons don't do a random walk from the center of the sun, and I'm the moron, not you. I guess we're in opposite land.

No intellectually honest person with a background in astrophysics would attempt to even begin to analogize photons radiating from the core of the sun to photons radiating from the surface of the earth so you are either dishonest in your claim of pursuit of a phD in astrophysics or are just dishonest.

They both involve diffusion of photons through optically thick media. Greenhouse gases make the atmosphere optically thick in the IR band.

P.S. You're not going to learn any physics by calling people who are 10 days away from having PhDs in the topic fakers.

 

[Meister]

You've been owned and the only one here that doesn't see it is the future dr. Go figure, by the way it's been a long time since someone has bragged so much about their education. Makes me a skeptic.

 

[OohPooPahDoo]

you've been owned and the only one here that doesn't see it is the future dr. Go figure, by the way it's been a long time since someone has bragged so much about their education. Makes me a skeptic.

i'm not the one who keeps bringing my credentials up

 

[Meister]

ITS SCATTERED ALONG the WAY

Shouting it won't make it true. Scattered by what? One absorption and emission and it is done. Other CO2 molecules can't absorb and emit it. Which other so called greenhouse gas absorbs and emits at a frequency so near CO2?

It doesn't matter if it doesn't get absorbed again, there's still a 50% chance it will be scattered back TOWARDS THE EARTH.

Already been through that and you exposed yourself as someone who is not working on a phD in astrophysics right there. Anyone pursuing that field of study at that level knows that the photons radiating from the core of the sun are in an enviornment involving a balance between the radiation and the local temperature. The time it takes for them to travel from the core to space is a result of the time it takes for the energy to be transferred, not the speed or random movements of the photons.

So now photons don't do a random walk from the center of the sun, and I'm the moron, not you. I guess we're in opposite land.

No intellectually honest person with a background in astrophysics would attempt to even begin to analogize photons radiating from the core of the sun to photons radiating from the surface of the earth so you are either dishonest in your claim of pursuit of a phD in astrophysics or are just dishonest.

They both involve diffusion of photons through optically thick media. Greenhouse gases make the atmosphere optically thick in the IR band.

P.S. You're not going to learn any physics by calling people who are 10 days away from having PhDs in the topic fakers.[/

Really!!!!

 

[Si modo]

Anyone who supports scientific misconduct shouldn't have any degree in the sciences.

 

[OohPooPahDoo]

Anyone who supports scientific misconduct shouldn't have any degree in the sciences.

Who supports scientific misconduct?

Who appointed you the conferrer of all degrees in the U.S.?

 

[OohPooPahDoo]

shouting it won't make it true. Scattered by what? One absorption and emission and it is done. Other co2 molecules can't absorb and emit it. Which other so called greenhouse gas absorbs and emits at a frequency so near co2?

it doesn't matter if it doesn't get absorbed again, there's still a 50% chance it will be scattered back towards the earth.




So now photons don't do a random walk from the center of the sun, and i'm the moron, not you. I guess we're in opposite land.

no intellectually honest person with a background in astrophysics would attempt to even begin to analogize photons radiating from the core of the sun to photons radiating from the surface of the earth so you are either dishonest in your claim of pursuit of a phd in astrophysics or are just dishonest.

they both involve diffusion of photons through optically thick media. Greenhouse gases make the atmosphere optically thick in the ir band.

p.s. You're not going to learn any physics by calling people who are 10 days away from having phds in the topic fakers.[/

really!!!!

really

 

[Meister]

it doesn't matter if it doesn't get absorbed again, there's still a 50% chance it will be scattered back towards the earth.




So now photons don't do a random walk from the center of the sun, and i'm the moron, not you. I guess we're in opposite land.



they both involve diffusion of photons through optically thick media. Greenhouse gases make the atmosphere optically thick in the ir band.

p.s. You're not going to learn any physics by calling people who are 10 days away from having phds in the topic fakers.[/

really!!!!

really

I got it now....you're just a poser.

 

[Si modo]

Anyone who supports scientific misconduct shouldn't have any degree in the sciences.

Who supports scientific misconduct?

....

You do. In this thread.

Hell, you didn't even know what it is.

.... Who appointed you the conferrer of all degrees in the U.S.?

Who said I was?

 

[OohPooPahDoo]

Anyone who supports scientific misconduct shouldn't have any degree in the sciences.

Who supports scientific misconduct?

....

You do. In this thread.

No I don't.

 

[IanC]

OPPD is right about how the energy from the Sun's core takes a long time to reach the surface butI think he is a bit credulous in believing all scientists are immune to human shortcomings when it impacts their careers.